Allowed

Ravindra Pandurang Bhatale v. the State of Mahrarashtra

Bombay HC2 Sept 2014ABA/1083/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused accused of offences under Sections 498A and 306 IPC. The court noted a dispute over money between the in-laws and confirmed an interim order requiring weekend attendance.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; interim order of Saturday attendance confirmed until filing of chargesheet.

Ravindra Pandurang Bhatale Vs the State of Mahrarashtra — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

3 ABA 1083 OF 2014

¶2

vks

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1083 OF 2014

¶4

Ravindra Pandurang Bhatale .. Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.

¶5

Mr. V. V. Nalavade, i/by CNS Law Association , for the Applicant.

¶6

Smt. A. A. Mane, APP for the respondent State.

¶7

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

¶8

DATE : 2^nd September, 2014

¶9

P.C.

¶10

Application is moved for pre-arrest

¶11

bail as the applicant accused is prosecuted

¶12

for the offences under Sections 498A, 306 of

¶13

the Indian Penal “Code in C.R.No.87 of 2014,

¶14

registered with Radhanagari Police Station,

¶15

District: Kolhapur. The offence is registered

¶16

on 28.7.2014. One Shamsundar Mandhare, the

¶17

father of the deceased has reported the

¶18

incident and offence to the police. It is the

¶19

case of complainant that his daughter Aradhana

¶20

got married the applicant on 21.12.2007.

¶21

Page No.1 of 5

¶22

3 ABA 1083 OF 2014

¶23

Thereafter she was residing with her husband.

¶24

She was elected as Deputy Sarpanch in 2013-14.

¶25

It is alleged that the applicant accused used

¶26

to beat and abuse her on trivial issues. It

¶27

is the case of the prosecution that the applicant accused used to harass her as she could not deliver baby boy. He was very hot tempered person. On 23.7.2014, the informant

¶28

received a phone from one Mahesh Sawant that Aradhana was serious due to snake bite and therefore, they were called to Radhanagari.

¶29

When they went to Radhanagari, Aradhana was

¶30

found dead and hurriedly her last rites were

¶31

performed. At that time the father noticed injury on her lip, therefore he questioned

¶32

about the injury to her husband. The applicant answered that he had killed Aradhana and he

¶33

had done whatever he wanted to do. It is the

¶34

case of prosecution that Aradhana had consumed

¶35

poison on 27.7.2014 or she was killed. It is the case of the prosecution that as

¶36

Page No.2 of 5

¶37

3 ABA 1083 OF 2014

¶38

Aradhana delivered two daughters and not a boy, therefore, she was humiliated often by the applicant accused.

¶39

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a month before incident, Aradhana and applicant have given an application to Tanta Mukti Samiti, Radhanagari that her father- the complainant was demanding

¶40

money from her and husband. He has purchased

¶41

a truck from the applicant accused. However, he did not pay an amount of Rs.1,55,000/- to the applicant accused and therefore, there was a dispute between the father-in-law and the son-in-law and hence Aradhana moved an applicant to the Tanta Mukti committee for requesting to look into the dispute a week before the incident. The parties appeared before the committee and the Committee given

¶42

its verdict directing complainant to pay an amount of Rs.1,55,000/- to his son-in-law i.e the applicant accused. So also Mahesh the

¶43

Page No.3 of 5

¶44

3 ABA 1083 OF 2014

¶45

brother of the deceased was staying in the house of the applicant accused and continued to stay in the said house. The learned counsel relied on the said decision dated 19.7.2014 taken by the Tanta Mukti Committee.

¶46

The parties have signed below it. He further submitted that the applicant is innocent. He has not committed any offence. The complaint of harassment is false.

¶47

The learned APP opposed the

¶48

application. She submitted that the deceased has committed suicide due to harassment. There was continuous nagging of not delivering a boy, but two daughters. Hence she submits that the application be rejected.

¶49

On perusal of the complaint. So also the decision of the Committee dated 19.7.2014, it appears that there was a dispute

¶50

in respect of the payment of amount between the applicant and the complaint. There is also some record to show that the complainant used

¶51

Page No.4 of 5

¶52

3 ABA 1083 OF 2014

¶53

to demand money from the applicant accused and the deceased. In view of this, the application is allowed. The interim order dated 26^th August, 2014 is confirmed. The applicant shall attend the concerned police station on every Saturday between 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. till filing of the chargesheet.

¶54

(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶55

Page No.5 of 5

Ravindra Pandurang Bhatale v. the State of Mahrarashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Pandurang Bhatale v. the State of Mahrarashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lakhan Baba Jawale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Revan Sudam Kanhere and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shrimant Akaram Mali Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balu Rama Waghmode Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sambhaji Biru Kolekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sachin Maruti Chougule Vs the State of Maharashtra